Nicholson, M P and Naamani, Z (1992) Managing architectural design: a recent survey. Construction Management and Economics, 10(6), pp. 479-487. ISSN 01446193
Abstract
The complexity of building projects and the increasing sophistication of professionals involved in construction are creating new challenges to building design management. For example the clients are not only interested in value for money in relation to the project cost but in cost in use through time of their buildings. Clients must show profits in competitive markets and architects have to understand the commercial aspects of buildings as well as the more central design parameters. Coping with these challenges requires a full understanding of the wide variety of contractual relationships between all of the parties involved in building; it requires a good understanding of advanced management techniques as well as the latest advancements in technology. This paper studies the architectural design process in the UK, to discover how it is managed and the levels of performance which are currently achieved in practice.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | architectural management; design costs; organization |
| Index terms: | markets, design parameter, profit, project cost, architectural design, architectural management, survey, building design management, contractual relationship, coping, architect, cost in use, value-for-money, design cost, complexity |
| Subjects: | financial analysis, design practice, economics, data collection methods, design constraints, profession, practice management, evaluation, design process, behavioral psychology, contractual relationship, systems engineering, economic analysis |
| Topics: | Engineering Principles, Design Practice, Research Practice, Roles and Professions, Contract Administration, Business Strategy, Cost Management, Value Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCE |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here